Can religion reject this science ?

[ratiocinator]

The only thing people have done is post some theories as if in some way they are evidence and falsify my 7 postulates .

This is blatantly untrue. Several people have pointed to experiments and observations that confirm the theories and refute the nonsense you are posting.

Evidence is all that really matters in science and the standard theories have lots of supporting evidence and they underpin the technology you are using to try to spread your ill-informed, un-argued, un-evidenced fantasies.

Unless you can make (exact, numerical) predictions that differ from the standard theories (which you can't because you don't understand maths) and then do an experiment that demonstrates that your predictions are correct, you have nothing but pointless daydreams.

You don't know what a scientific theory is, you don't understand mathematics, you don't understand the role mathematics plays in science, and you don't even seem understand the importance of evidence.

You'd do yourself a big favour if you stopped fantasising and started learning.

 

[james blunt]

But as I have shown by a very simple question, you do not have any theories. You do not even seem to understand the term.

What simple question ?

I've asked you several questions that you have ignored , you have just ignored the question again and demonstrated to the readers that you can't falsify my postulates .

 

[james blunt]

This is blatantly untrue. Several people have pointed to experiments and observations that confirm the theories and refute the nonsense you are posting.
.

No they haven't , show me one experiment where you can destroy or create space ?

You're blatantly lying, you've demonstrated nothing and shown no observation .

I've also demonstrated time is constant and does not slow down or speed up !

 

[Workman]

To me , 0 is not a number it is the representation of absolute and everything is relative to the absolute . Numbers greater than 0 are arbitrary but relative , they represent quantity etc which we would struggle without . I suppose all numbers above 0 have the same value in the sense of relative measurement .

No numbers can exist without the 0 therefore giving 0 most in valuable. isn’t? Well IMO though! That’s fine always good to hear another’s opinion

 

[Subduction Zone]

What simple question ?

I've asked you several questions that you have ignored , you have just ignored the question again and demonstrated to the readers that you can't falsify my postulates .

You are in no position to demand answers to questions. The simple question I asked you time and time again that tells us that you do not have a theory is:

"What reasonable test would show your theory to be wrong if it is wrong?"

You could not think of any. That tells us all you have at best is an ad hoc explanation. Worthless in the world of science.

 

[ratiocinator]

I've also demonstrated time is constant and does not slow down or speed up !

That is untrue - you haven't demonstrated it - you've just asserted it. The evidence from experiments shows, unequivocally, that you are wrong. You can't dismiss the result of experiments with baseless assertions.

There is absolutely no doubt at all that time dilation happens - it's been directly measured.

 

[james blunt]

You are in no position to demand answers to questions. The simple question I asked you time and time again that tells us that you do not have a theory is:

"What reasonable test would show your theory to be wrong if it is wrong?"

You could not think of any. That tells us all you have at best is an ad hoc explanation. Worthless in the world of science.

Destroy some space ?

 

[Workman]

To me , 0 is not a number it is the representation of absolute and everything is relative to the absolute . Numbers greater than 0 are arbitrary but relative , they represent quantity etc which we would struggle without . I suppose all numbers above 0 have the same value in the sense of relative measurement .

I would think that numbers cannot be without zero(0) allowing it!
Therefore making zero more in valuable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is untrue - you haven't demonstrated it - you've just asserted it. The evidence from experiments shows, unequivocally, that you are wrong. You can't dismiss the result of experiments with baseless assertions.

There is absolutely no doubt at all that time dilation happens - it's been directly measured.

Here is another article on how time dilation has been directly observed:

Is there any practical proof for time dilation?

It of course mentions muons, the first confirmation of time dilation was through them. There should be almost zero muons from cosmic rays hitting the surface of the Earth if there was no such thing as time dilation and yet they are readily observable.

 

[james blunt]

That is untrue - you haven't demonstrated it - you've just asserted it. The evidence from experiments shows, unequivocally, that you are wrong. You can't dismiss the result of experiments with baseless assertions.

There is absolutely no doubt at all that time dilation happens - it's been directly measured.

I have already told you that your semantics and interpretation of the results are incorrect . I have demonstrated the falsity of the theory and light clock experiment . You're ignoring it .

 

[Subduction Zone]

Destroy some space ?

How is that reasonable? How would you even attempt to destroy space?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have already told you that your semantics and interpretation of the results are incorrect . I have demonstrated the falsity of the theory and light clock experiment . You're ignoring it .

No, you have asserted using bad math.

 

[james blunt]

I would think that numbers cannot be without zero(0) allowing it!
Therefore making zero more in valuable.

0 is the biggest number in a sense it can be infinite .

 

[james blunt]

How is that reasonable? How would you even attempt to destroy space?

See ! Now you are seeing the postulates truths . Exactly , how would you even attempt it !

I have two golden principles

1) possible

2) Impossible

There is no way to destroy space , Nukes don't do it , lasers don't .

Hence golden principle 2

and

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

An axiom , self evident .


Do you agree now in number 1 so we can go on to number 2?

 

[ratiocinator]

I have demonstrated the falsity of the theory and light clock experiment .

Untrue.

 

[james blunt]

Untrue.

Dude , I demonstrated in simplicity , I even did diagrams, give over , they have it wrong .

I can demonstrate with the Twins if you like ?


The traveling twin does not return to twin one in a different time zone .

What this means is if its Midnight on twins one clock , the traveling twin does not return at 11.45 to see the clock says midnight

 

[ratiocinator]

I demonstrated in simplicity , I even did diagrams, give over , they have it wrong .

You don't seem to understand what 'demonstrate' means (I'll add it to the list). Your diagrams and the word salad that accompanied them didn't even make sense.

Even if they seemed to make perfect sense, it would still be valueless in the face of the evidence.

 

[james blunt]

You don't seem to understand what 'demonstrate' means (I'll add it to the list). Your diagrams and the word salad that accompanied them didn't even make sense.

Even if they seemed to make perfect sense, it would still be valueless in the face of the evidence.

Dude you have no evidence of a time dilation . I've pointed out the errors . Your semantics suck big time and science doesn't even understand its own science . The Keating experiment is a timing dilation , not a time dilation .

Say it ... timing .....timing....not time ....

 

[Subduction Zone]

See ! Now you are seeing the postulates truths . Exactly , how would you even attempt it !

I have two golden principles

1) possible

2) Impossible

There is no way to destroy space , Nukes don't do it , lasers don't .

Hence golden principle 2

and

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

An axiom , self evident .


Do you agree now in number 1 so we can go on to number 2?

Your axioms are neither self evident nor are they confirmed by nature. They are only your prejudices. You do realize that space is thought to expand, and though you cannot properly define what you mean by "creating space" that would appear to demonstrate that you are wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Dude you have no evidence of a time dilation . I've pointed out the errors . Your semantics suck big time and science doesn't even understand its own science . The Keating experiment is a timing dilation , not a time dilation .

Say it ... timing .....timing....not time ....

Now you have only demonstrated that you do not understand the nature of evidence since there is clear evidence for time dilation. Would you care to start there?